SA Footy

Booney wrote:Whilst I'm not going to over react to a loss like that, I'm measured enough ( I think ) to acknowledge the form the Bulldogs are currently in, I am going to bring into question the coaching group.

Clearly our plan for 2015 was to continue the blitz of 2014. Run from defence, take the game on at all costs and back ourselves to create enough opportunities to score more than the opposition. It seems as though the defensive side of our preseason may have been neglected.

Meanwhile, West Coast and the Western Bulldogs ( with Simpson and Beveridge out of the Hawthorn coaching stable ) are working on the defensive zones that have made them both top 4 sides. Now, both sides boast pretty good forward lines, but not many would say Port don't either. Schulz, Wingard, Monfries, Ryder, Westhoff and a Gray/Boak reads pretty well on paper and stacks up against either the Eagles or Dogs front half. Stacks up very well.

This group ( bar Wingard ) have had their confidence shot by the stop start play of the mids and defenders that has been caused by our inability to use the ball well enough to penetrate the zones most clubs now adopt. On the flip side it seems we don't play a zone and if we do either the formation doesn't work or the personnel in the zone aren't sticking to the structures.

So if it's a lack of zone being used, the coaches need to be looked at. Clearly the modern game is not about one-on-one forward v defender. It has moved past that for the top sides. So, do we play a zone? No, I don't think we do. I've seen enough games from Level 1 of the Riverbank Stand this year to say we don't. We play man-on-man.

With GWS, Hawthorn ( oh **** ), Gold Coast and Fremantle to come I think we might not win another one for the year and what I'd like to see in the next month is the start of a defensive zone being put in place. Use this 4 weeks as a lead into 2016 pre-season built around an improved team defence structure.

I think Lobbe will be dropped this week, he really should be anyway. He's either not fit or just really, really lacking any confidence and his pressure on the opposition on Saturday was deplorable.

As for talk of players being jealous or upset about what Ryder is on, talk about them being worked too hard on the training track. **** me. Toughen up buttercup and get on with it. From what I understand this pre-season they had this year was hardly anything compared to the one before and with an early finish this year coming I think they can expect a massive one ahead.

Jim05 wrote:

Booney wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:

MW wrote:no one will go near him at this age for any decent pick.

Still producing decent footy, I think he'd be a handy 2 or 3 year player for a club that needs to fill gaps around the ground.

Yeah, but who wants to bring a massive cockhead into a playing group that is heading up the ladder?

Dogs took Aker and Richmond took Cousins, plenty of cockheads have changed clubs

Jim05 wrote:

Booney wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:

MW wrote:no one will go near him at this age for any decent pick.

Still producing decent footy, I think he'd be a handy 2 or 3 year player for a club that needs to fill gaps around the ground.

Yeah, but who wants to bring a massive cockhead into a playing group that is heading up the ladder?

Dogs took Aker and Richmond took Cousins, plenty of cockheads have changed clubs

Booney wrote:I disagree there mate.

Schulz 66 goals last year.Monfries 21 last year (missed several games) and 39 the year before. Both have had their confidence eroded to the point they look average, they are much better than we have seen this year and much of it is to do with delivery not their ability. ****, any forward in our side this year would have struggled.

Westhoff can't hold down a spot? 31 goals in 13, 30 last year, playing high forward / pinch hitting in ruck and lose man in defence when needed. He's much maligned and I think a lot of the time unfairly. People don't take into account the work he does in the middle and behind the ball when they look at his as a CHF. He's not a CHF in the traditional sense and never has been. He's always been more of a high forward/utility.

West Coast - Agreed, Kennedy, LeCras and Darling all top shelf.

Bulldogs - Crameri is too inconsistent, Dickson and Stringer very good and Dahlhaus plays as a run with mid. Redpath looks promising and the Bont only goes there when the ball is there like a Gray or Boak does.

Lightning McQueen wrote:Richmond took Cousins because he brought a lot of speed to the club.

carey wrote:big carry on about Ken swinging the axe big changes. Bullshit there was, Lobbe yes bigger name but totally deserved to be dropped.

Sam C yep burns the footy to much but will remain long term and Cluery yep I don't think his in our best 22.

My issue is Moore and Young, Why not give these blokes a month to see if they'll make it? We know what Mitchell offers but do we know what these 2 can do? For mine Moore needs an extended run in the side. I believe we should've went with Broadbent and Hartlett that would've sent a bigger better message to the playing group that this piss weak 2015 isn't good enough.

Krak shouldn't of been dropped anyway but Amon should've come in instead of Mitchell

carey wrote:big carry on about Ken swinging the axe big changes. Bullshit there was, Lobbe yes bigger name but totally deserved to be dropped.

Sam C yep burns the footy to much but will remain long term and Cluery yep I don't think his in our best 22.

My issue is Moore and Young, Why not give these blokes a month to see if they'll make it? We know what Mitchell offers but do we know what these 2 can do? For mine Moore needs an extended run in the side. I believe we should've went with Broadbent and Hartlett that would've sent a bigger better message to the playing group that this piss weak 2015 isn't good enough.

Krak shouldn't of been dropped anyway but Amon should've come in instead of Mitchell

Spargo wrote:

carey wrote:big carry on about Ken swinging the axe big changes. Bullshit there was, Lobbe yes bigger name but totally deserved to be dropped.

Sam C yep burns the footy to much but will remain long term and Cluery yep I don't think his in our best 22.

My issue is Moore and Young, Why not give these blokes a month to see if they'll make it? We know what Mitchell offers but do we know what these 2 can do? For mine Moore needs an extended run in the side. I believe we should've went with Broadbent and Hartlett that would've sent a bigger better message to the playing group that this piss weak 2015 isn't good enough.

Krak shouldn't of been dropped anyway but Amon should've come in instead of Mitchell

Dropping "bigger name" players when the season was on the line would've sent a stronger message, not now the season is shot & the pressure has diminished.

Booney wrote:Clurey desperately unlucky. Really unlucky.

Moore and Young, are we trying to piss them off to head elsewhere? Up and down, up and down and when the opportunity arises to give them an extended run we bung them back to play the Bays at the Bay.

Mitchell? Why oh why? We know what he offers, run. So **** what? It's about as useful as me downing 9 pints in the Magarey Bar to the side.

Bit baffled, but, then again, who else could come in? I'm not up for just gifting someone a game, it does have to be earned.

UK Fan wrote:Port now arguing too many teams in Melbourne and in the AFL as a whole.

So let me get this straight, you were a joke of a club with crowds of under 20k in a two team city just two years ago.

The State Government builds you a $600mill stadium at taxpayers expense, you now get 40k through no good work of your own and now you are playing the ‘we’re awesome and other clubs are custard’ card?

How does f@ck off sound?

Does Koch plan to hug the presidents after closing down the Melbourne clubs.

tigerhutch wrote:Well it is true there are too many Melbourne clubs ..... It's not rocket science ..... But don't worry it's not going to change for a very long time..